1. Field of the Invention
The present invention, in general relates to a system and method for determining empathy between two people and, more particularly, to an Internet-based system for determining a subjective index that is representative of the level of empathy that two people have for one-another.
For significant relationships that include boyfriend and girlfriend, husband and wife, or other life-partners and potential life-partners, it is desirable to promote peaceful, harmonious relationships.
Much study has gone into determining and measuring compatibility based on a comparison of values, goals, religious affiliation and the like. There are numerous compatibility tests that people can take which measure these areas.
Still, people who fare well on such “value-based” compatibility types of tests often suffer in their most intimate relationships. And oddly enough, sometimes people who have significant differences in these areas are able to find a way to relate in a healthy, peaceful, and harmonious way making space for these differences. Accordingly, the dynamics of relationship success have remained a mystery.
However, a key factor to predicting success in relating can simply be stated by saying that success is more about “how well people know each other” than about what they have in common. It is from that level of mutual understanding, or empathy for one another, that people modify their behavioral interactions. For example, if a man knows that his partner does not like to sleep in total darkness, then that man may be amenable to using a night-light. Conversely, a total lack of awareness of the needs of his partner might make him insensitive to allowing a night-light to remain on.
Accordingly, it is how well people know each other, perhaps more than anything else, that determines their ultimate compatibility. They can be adherents of the same religion, share numerous values and similar goals, enjoy participating in the same sports and hobbies, but because the fabric of relationship is infinitely more subtle than these course measurements can reveal, they can continue to injure one another until they discover they are not compatible and eventually decide to separate.
Empathy includes more than merely knowing another person. Empathy generally includes an ability to also identify with and understand the feelings, situation, and motives of another person, to paraphrase a definition from Webster's New College Dictionary. This ability to identify with another person arises from an especially deep understanding of the other person. For example, a first person can be intellectually aware of a particular phobia that another (i.e., a second) person has. This intellectual awareness is indicative of a certain level of empathy for the other person. When the first person's awareness also includes a deeper understanding of how and why the second person developed the phobia in the first place, then there is more likelihood for acceptance of the phobia instead of a judgment rising up against it. This deeper level of awareness, of knowing even more about the second person, is indicative of a greater degree of empathy for the other (second) person. If the first person can further relate the experiences of the second person to perhaps a similar frightening experience that they had, possibly in childhood, then there is an even greater possibility that the phobia of the second person will be gently accepted rather than harshly judged. This deeper level of awareness includes a level of self-awareness as well as that of knowing even more about the second person, and it too is indicative of even greater degrees of empathy for the other (second) person. A key to acceptance of one's partner is seen as twofold, a first and especially critical part being how deeply they know each other and the second being how well they know themselves so that they can relate the needs of their partner with those of themselves.
Assessing the level of empathy, including an awareness they have of each other's preferences and needs, is quite different than prior types of compatibility testing that essentially make a tally of these and other factors scoring high when there are many “like” factors and scoring low when there are substantial “differences”.
Empathy instead speaks to the knowledge that each person has about the other person in these and other areas instead of the mere number of “hits and misses”. There can be any number of differences in needs, preferences, values, etc., and because the two people really know each other (and themselves) well, empathy is high, and they are immanently compatible.
When the empathy level is high, a person knows the needs, preferences, even the issues and “buttons” that the other person has and can therefore choose to respond in ways that calm and soothe any given situation, rather than inflame it.
It matters little what the differences are as long as they are mutually known and accepted. Love is really about accepting the other person as they are and to do so one must be willing and able to learn about the other person, both in detail and in increasing depth as time passes, so as to understand the deep and rich nature that this other person possesses. In other words, you cannot accept what you are not even aware of. This overall awareness of the other person (and yourself) can be stated as your level of empathy for the other person. If people well understand each other and if, from this clear understanding they are able to accept each other, then the differences in values, habits, preferences, religion—almost anything that can be named—is diminished even to the point of utter insignificance.
Because all prior compatibility tests fail to effectively assess empathy, they therefore fail to optimally predict long-term relationship survivability (i.e., long-term compatibility).
When people share high levels of empathy they well understand each other's issues, needs, preferences, likes, and dislikes. From this understanding, each person has the awareness that is absolutely necessary if they are to modify their behavior so that they don't repeatedly injure the other person, for example, by saying something that brings up and aggravates an old wound (i.e., issue).
For example, if a woman was sensitive about her appearance and in particular about her lipstick because a previous life-partner had often bitterly complained about her appearance and in particular about her choice in the shade of lipstick she might (likely) have a strong reaction to criticism in this area.
If her current partner is unaware of this sensitivity (i.e., if he has a low level of empathy about issues appertaining to her appearance) then he might occasionally say critical things about her appearance and on occasion about the shade of lipstick she is wearing. Such comments are likely to cause substantial pain for the woman.
It is important to note that the pain experienced by the woman in this case would appear to be disproportionate to the severity of any remark that was made. Even a mildly disapproving comment about the shade of lipstick could trigger many unpleasant memories for the woman who would likely feel a disproportionate amount of hurt and upset as a result. It matters not that her partner meant to cause her no harm. The pain is felt because an unhealed wound from the past exists in her psyche. We each have our own unique mix of wounds and issues because we each have our own unique history which has helped to shape and mold our own unique personality. Whenever two people relate, they each bring their own unique mix or personalities into the relationship.
However, if he was instead well aware of this lipstick issue, he might then have abstained from making such types of comments. If he really understood her feelings in this area, he might even intervene on her behalf if he overheard another person saying something disparaging to her about her appearance. The woman would then likely feel that her partner cared for her, that he understood and loved her, that her needs were important to him. If she observed him intervening on her behalf, stronger feelings of love and approval for her partner are the likely result.
Accordingly, through such an awareness, through empathy, a partner is better able to relate in ways that promote feelings of love, peace, harmony, and safety. When it comes to relationship, ignorance is a cause of pain, not bliss.
Empathy implies a state of being that also includes more a dose of compassion, of caring. A healthy, empathic human being who becomes aware of what causes pain to another human being experiences an automatic innate avoidance to causing injury. Substantially healthy people normally and naturally do not want to injure each other. Quite the opposite, they spontaneously want to repeat the behaviors that they know will please those they care about.
There are disorders that some people experience where they don't particularly care if their actions cause injury to others. Such a lack of empathy is believed to arise primarily from traumas and abuses they experienced early in their lives and which have not been fully healed (as through appropriate therapy). Such “personality disorders” are not the norm and are generally rare. It is very unusual to encounter a person who is aware of the needs of another and willfully trespasses on those needs. These injured people, while they may be aware of some of the needs of others, do not value the needs of others and therefore have a low level of empathy, or regard for the feelings of others. Until they heal their own significant wounds enough to find satisfaction in being empathic of others, they will not be able to engage in relationship as a caring, nurturing life-partner.
As such, the level of empathy between two people becomes a barometer to predicting their chances of success in relationship, whether they are to become intimate life-partners or if the relationship is to develop into good and caring, nurturing and supportive friends.
Assessing empathy between two people can also be used as an effective remedial tool. It is possible and even likely that there is at least one particular area where even the most compatible of couples lack empathy for the feelings and needs of the other.
Heretofore, there has been no effective way of determining those areas of relationship where empathy levels are high, that is where the two people really know each other well and deeply, and of determining those areas of relationship where empathy levels are low, that is where either or both of the two people don't understand the needs, feelings, and idiosyncrasies of their partner especially well.
If such a measurement tool were possible, then couples could use the information in a most constructive way, that is to talk to each other more about those areas that they are weak in their mutual understanding of one-another.
For example, let us assume that a couple understands each other well regarding their views about exercise, diet, fitness, and health issues in general. It is not important that they share identical viewpoints about these or any other topic. One person can be well into exercise going to the gym several times a week whereas the other may put little thought or energy into exercise. Knowing each other's attitudes, needs, fears, desires is what is important. It is not necessary that they reach any compromise nor come to any agreement as to what is the “right” amount of exercise. It would be counterproductive for a couple, where one person goes to the gym six times per week and the other not at all, to agree to a compromise where they both go three times per week. That would fail to meet the needs of either person, yet this type of compromise is often touted as an approach to solving relationship differences. Rather, a much higher and better goal is to understand the other person's needs so well and so deeply that is becomes easier to accept them than to judge them as somehow being wrong.
If the exercise-resistant person understands the other person's need in this area and allows the pro-exercise partner to go to the gym as often as he or she likes, then there is not likely to be any problem in the relationship concerning attitudes toward health, exercise and fitness training. This level of understanding and awareness is much more likely to develop after the exercise-resistant person has learned considerably more about the pro-exercise person.
For example, the exercise-resistant person may discover that the pro-exercise person's mother, father, and siblings all led sedentary lives and that all of them succumbed to heart-disease at an early age. The exercise-resistant person may also learn that a cardiologist has deemed the pro-exercise person to be in an especially high-risk group for developing heart disease and, accordingly, has advised the pro-exercise person to exercise daily. As stated hereinabove, from this increased level of understanding, of empathy, the exercise-resistant person is then likely to easily, effortlessly let go of any harsh judgments regarding the amount of exercise the other person requires. In fact, the exercise-resistant person is likely to even support and encourage this exercise in proportion to the love that is felt for him or her. This is due both to the natural desire not to re-injure others, as was previously discussed, and also to simply wanting the other person to live a long and healthy life. We see by this example how increasing empathy can lead toward increasing levels of acceptance and even support when before there was primarily judgment against the other person.
Empathy does for relationship what no amount of compromise can. In compromise, people sometimes feel that they must lose part of themselves in order to satisfy the other. With empathy, people learn to better accept the other person as they are.
If, however, the exercise-resistant person remains unaware of the fundamental beliefs, fears, concerns, etc. that contribute to the other person's desire for exercise, then pressure may be put on the pro-exercise person to attend the gym less frequently. Conversely, if the pro-exercise person is unaware of the beliefs and attitudes that contribute to the other's avoidance of physical exercise, then the pro-exercise person may inadvertently apply pressure to the exercise-resistant person to make further efforts in this area, again to the possible overall detriment of the relationship.
If it can be determined that they both well understand the attitudes and resultant needs of the other, there does not have to be any problem amongst them. From a deep level of understanding, each can create the necessary space that makes it OK for the other person to just be who they are, and to even be loved for it. This is the heart of acceptance and it can only come from a high level of empathy.
If it can be determined that the two people do not understand the needs of each other, that their level of empathy is low in this particular area (i.e., exercise), then a topic for further discussion has been identified and this information is particularly useful in that it can bring to an end their ignorance and therefore also put an end to repeated injury arising from such ignorance.
It is also possible to determine significant problems, red-flags, as they are sometimes called. For example, in determining the attitudes each person has toward alcohol consumption, it can also be determined that a potential substance-abuse issue may exist. It is possible that one or both people can be aware of a high or frequent level of alcohol consumption, yet not be inclined to act on this issue because it is potentially risky and disturbing to the status quo of the relationship.
Accordingly, the instant system and method for determining empathy has the potential to detect potential problem areas in relationship regardless of either of the person's attitudes or even their level of empathy in this regard. For example, both people can be aware of excessive or frequent alcohol consumption by one of them. In this regard, though the empathy level would be high, neither person may see this behavior as a potential source of difficulty.
Accordingly, the system and method could be used to generate a suggestive referral that urges the affected person(s) to obtain professional help in this area. Clearly, this unexpected benefit could help to identify problem areas in a relationship before they become especially acute.
Not only is there a need for such a system, there is a need to allow others to participate at their own leisure and in an non-pressured way. Few people enjoy taking any type of a test. Most men are especially reluctant to participate in anything that has to do with “feelings”, lest their own ineptitude in identifying and talking about their own or another person's feelings, surface.
Ideally, a system that measures empathy would not make any answer wrong. If this were clear from the onset, resistance to taking such a test would diminish.
Also, it is important to allow each person to take such an evaluation in private, as is strongly recommended, so as to lessen any possibility of interference or influence from their partner affecting their answers. While it is technically possible to take the test side by side with their partner, this is not preferred. It is, of course, possible for each person to take the test simultaneously from different locations. It is also possible for each person to take the test one after the other, however they may decide, as well as to go back and change answers until each person is satisfied. As mentioned above, it is desirable that each person be able to participate even if separated by great distance.
It is also important to preserve confidence regarding the answers and resultant “scores”, otherwise fear that others aside from the test participants could possibly access and learn about the intimate details of one or both of the test participants, would arise. Furthermore, flexibility in presenting the scores can be useful in reflecting the empathy that a first person has for a second person, the empathy the second person has for the first, and a composite level of empathy, if desired. The empathy could be about a particular question, a related group of questions, an overall level of one person's empathy regarding the other or, as mentioned above, any composite type of a score. Such scores would therefore be useful in providing an index of one's empathy as a composite or a plurality of indices of empathy for each question or grouping, as desired.
Furthermore, the input data thus obtained can be retained in a data base. The raw input data can track gender, geography, ethnicity, or any other parameter that is desired. The accumulated data can be assembled and categorized as desired and then sold, absent the names of the participants of course, to researchers, therapists and others for a variety of constructive purposes. Perhaps many unsolved riddles about attraction and relationship can be solved as a result of the data thus accumulated.
Of course, participation in such a system could be made available on a fee basis. Preferably one member of a “couple” would pay the required fee and subscribe to the service, preferably using the Internet, and in so doing identify the other person (i.e., his or her partner) who would then later log on as well in order to participate. The initial subscriber would either be given (or select) a password that would be used in the log-in procedure. Accordingly, the system and method for determining empathy has the potential to generate significant revenue streams, worldwide. Participation could also be sold in group, such as to therapists, corporations, or to various organizations who could then make the system and method for determining empathy available to other couples/pairings of people.
The questions can and will, of course, be amended over time to better adapt to any particular situation, for example to a homosexual versus a heterosexual couple. As the system is used over time, refinements in the questions that are asked can enhance the accuracy of the results that are obtained. If desired, the questions can be tailored to more accurately assess the level of empathy between any two people once the nature of their relationship is ascertained. Are they in a new relationship in which they have recently begun dating one-another? Are they in a committed relationship? Are they married? Are they sexually intimate with each other? What is each person's gender? These and other factors can be used to better tailor the system and method for determining empathy to the needs of the participants, as desired. It can also be included as part of the input data that is retained in the data base and which can be of further help in various future research projects.
The benefits of having a high level of empathy can be expanded to include more than potential life-partners. What is the level of empathy between parent and child or between siblings? What is the level of empathy between co-workers who share office space? What is the level of empathy between a manager and his subordinates? Clearly, such a system can be expanded to determine the level of empathy between any two people, and hopefully used to improve that relationship.
A definition of compatibility has to do with having a capability of living or performing in a harmonious, agreeable, or friendly association with another person (paraphrasing Webster's New College Dictionary). Empathy provides the basis, the foundation, for that capability to arise.
Accordingly, there exists today a need for a system and method for determining empathy between two people.
Clearly, such a system and method would be useful and desirable.
2. Description of Prior Art
Compatibility tests are, in general, known. While the structural arrangements of the above described products and methods, at first appearance, may have similarities with the present invention, they differ in material respects. These differences, which will be described in more detail hereinafter, are essential for the effective use of the invention and which admit of the advantages that are not available with the prior devices.